Applying House’s Translation Quality Assessment Model (2015) on Literary Texts

Safa Hassan Ahmed   Al-Haddad

doi:10.58963/qausrj.v1i21.177

Authors

Safa Hassan Ahmed Al-Haddad Queen Arwa University Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.58963/qausrj.v1i21.177

Keywords:

Translation quality assessment , field , tenor , and mode

Abstract

This study is an attempt to evaluate and assess the quality of the translation of the novel Beloved (1987) by Morrison from English into Arabic in light of House’s model in its latest modified version that has been published in 2015. The analysis covers selected parts of the source and target texts comparing the source text’s profile and target text’s profile to come up with the mismatches at the register level i.e. (field, tenor, and mode) suggested by House’s 2015 model. The analysis of the source text and target text has revealed a number of mismatches along these dimensions where these mismatches caused a change of the interpersonal functional component. The statement of quality at the end states that the end product was far less than the original work in terms of linguistic employment.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Alayouti, A. (1989). Mahboubah. Cairo: Al-Ahram Center.

Alduais, A. (2012). Simple sentence structure of standard Arabic language and standard English language: A Contrastive Study. International Journal of Linguistics, 4(4), 500-524.

Alikhademi, A. (2015). The Application of House’s model on Longman’s medical embryology and Its Persian translation. British Journal of Education, 3(2), 1-20.

Almanna, A. (2016). The Routledge course in translation annotation: Arabic-English-Arabic. London & New York: Routledge.

Al-Monjed. 35th ed. (1997). Beirut: Al-Maktabah Alsharqiyah.

Al-Qinai, J. (1999). Asymmetry of gender markedness in English-Arabic translation. Theoretical linguistics, 25 (1), 75-96.

Baker, M. (1992). In other words. London & New York: Routledge.

Bassnett, S. (2002). Translation studies. 3rd ed. London: Routledge.

Bell, R. (1991). Translation and translating: theory and practice. London & New York: Longman.

Dickins, J., Hervey, S., & Higgins, I. (2017). Thinking Arabic translation: a course in translation methods: Arabic to English. London: Routledge.

Green, L. (2002). African American English: A linguistic introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hassan, B.A (2015). A Translation quality qssessment of the English translation of the Hilali Epic. Journal of Arts and Humanities, 4(12), 59-70.

House, J. (2015). Translation quality assessment: past and present. London: Routledge.

House, J. (1981). A Model for translation quality assessment. Tübingen: Narr.

Jawad, H. (2009). Repetition in literary Arabic: foregrounding, backgrounding, and Translation Strategies. Meta, 54(4), 753-769.

Jureczek, P. (2017). Literary translation quality assessment: An approach based on Roland Barthes’ Five Literary Codes. TranslatoLogica: A Journal of Translation, Language, and Literature, 1,136-155.

Morrison, T. (1987). Beloved. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.

Nida, E., & Taber, S. (1982). The Theory and practice of translation. Netherlands: Leiden.

Nord, C. (1997). Translating as a purposeful activity. Manchester: Stjerome.

Reiss, K. (2000). Translation criticism: The potentials and limitations. London & New York: Taylor & Francis.

Schafnner, C. Ed (1998). Translation and quality current issues in language and society. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters LTD.

Williams, M. (2009). Translation quality assessment. Mutatis Mutandis, 2(1), 2-23.